Content: Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Background: Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Pattern: Blank Waves Notes Sharp Wood Rockface Leather Honey Vertical Triangles
Welcome to TerraFirmaCraft Forums

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.

  • Announcements

    • Crysyn

      Only help if you can be helpful

      Hey All, A topic has come up of late in the IRC channel in regards to the general feel of the forums and the community that supports them. Things have progressed further than I would have liked with out this being addressed more publicly because I would much rather have snubbed this out sooner rather than later.. but I have been busy. Here is the general rule I would like people to follow: Wheaton's Law "Don't be a dick." Those of you from the IRC channel know that this is the only rule I ask people in there to follow and we generally have a good and lively time chatting about all manner of things. This is basic rule that just about everyone understands and I am going to expand it to the forums from here moving forward. If you can not help people in a helpful and polite manner then I simply ask you to stop. Now I generally take a back seat to moderating the forums as I like to participate in the suggestions forum fairly heavily at times and would rather do so as a forums user than a moderator. But I am also fairly well known for being the person who constantly puts their foot down and so I am stepping up and doing so on here. If you find yourself unable to respond to a message politely then I ask that you do not respond. This mostly focuses on the increasing level of hostility found within the Suggestion forum as well as the Server forum. I do not care if this is the 30th some odd time you have seen someone make the same suggestion. Or even if the new post on an older topic is one entry above the old one. I expect the members of this forum to respond politely to the user, new or old, and point to the older topic if it applies and even go the extra step to suggest they either add in new information or to summarize the outcome of the previous discussion based upon the new post's entry into it. That is what we are here for, that is why I close most topics instead of deleting them, so that they can be found and referenced down the road. The next topic is the slew of derailment attempts I have seen as of late. If you want to have fun and joke around that is what the off topic forum is for and pretty much anything goes there. I do not expect to read a suggestion thread and have to go through 3 pages of image memes people have shot back and forth. Quite simply this is a waste of my time to read and then have to clean up. Now for the summary. I am going to start taking a more active role, especially in policing the suggestion forum, and handing out warn levels to people whom I see doing this. These will be indiscriminate and applied not to just the first person who derails or is impolite on a topic or response, but to everyone whom follows the lead of that person. As I do not like doing things with out giving you all warning this post shall serve as that warning. If you have a desire to bring this topic up with me then I invite you to do so on the IRC channel. Lets raise the level of quality and grow the community. Let us not descend into the quality often found on the minecraft or league of legend forums. There is simply no need for that here. Be passionate about things, just do not be abusive.
    • Kittychanley

      Offline Servers

      Recently I've seen a few server listings showing up on the first page of the Servers forum that have been closed for an extended period of time, but have recently gotten a reply from a new member who didn't realize the server is offline. To help prevent this from happening in the future, it would be greatly appreciated if you could use the report function on the original post of any servers that have been confirmed as offline, so that the topic may be locked. If you are the admin of a server and plan on taking the server offline, please use the report function on the original post of your topic to let the TFC Staff know that the topic should be locked. If you are the admin of a server that has a locked topic, and would wish to bring the server back online, please use the report function on the original post of the topic to let the TFC Staff know that the topic should be unlocked. As always, please remember to follow rule #3 of the servers forum and update your topic title to contain the version of TFC that the server is currently running. You can do so by editing the OP, and then clicking on "Use Full Editor."


  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Darmo

  1. Eh, nothing special about my technique in general.  I basically clear-mine level by level, leaving a 2-thick floor between.  I cherry pick the ores from this floor, and replace them with cobblestone to leave a smooth supported ceiling on the 'bottom' of the floor, and a smooth walking surface on the 'top' of the floor.   In between I mine alternating blocks to maximize raw stone gain (and naturally reduces pick usage a bit, since raw blocks pop off without the pick).   Easy to navigate, no dangerous drops, no jumping.  I like to keep it simple.  I'm not generally that concerned about time, and pick durability doesn't really concern me much, unless I'm at the very, very start, with my first copper or bronze pick - but then, I enjoy smithing and usually have 2-3 spare pick heads in a vessel on me at all times.  I just take it one 5x5 bay at a time, and stop going in a given direction when I get less than X ores per bay.  X varying depending on the ore in question and the richness, and how into mining I am at the time.  After I 'finish' a level, I wall off around the ladder shaft, and leave a door, so that when the level goes dark I don't have to worry about mobs jumping me on my way up/down. 


  2. Interesting method.  I'm always curious to see how others mine as well.  You definitely fall on the organized side of things.  After you've got your framework set up, do you just sort of 'swiss cheese' mine the ores, or do you mine in organized levels?  It seems like you're setting up for swiss cheese, but your screenshots look like you've got some level organization going on.


  3. Ok, I've made a few basic tiles:  BrickBasket01.pngBrickBasket02.pngBrickBondDarkLeft.pngBrickBondDarkRight.pngBrickHerring.pngBrickSoldier.png

    They are basket weave 1 and 2, dark bond left, dark bond right, herring, and soldier.  I think they're pretty versatile, as seen in the below image.  The soldiers as half slabs make good window sills and lintels, or on a stair block, good stairs or corbels. 


    Herringbone and basket are mostly paving patterns, but you can sometimes find herringbone patterns in old structures, as infill.  IRL it's normally diagonal with relation to the framing, simply because it looks better that way.  The one on the right also has some basket weave.  Basket weave and Herringbone irl are not structurally strong, so they're ok infilling around structure like this, but you wouldn't have built an entire wall out of these patterns, back in the day. 


    Here are I used only the left and right dark bond patterns to make 3 different larger wall patterns:


    Due to our small tile size and even brick layout per tile, we'd probably be limited mostly to left and right diagonals, and then horizontal stripes, at least within standard running bond pattern.  Which is a lot of tiles to make anyway, even for just a couple bond colors.   Other bond patterns would bring other possibilities. 






  4. I like that a lot.  I feel like he looks a lot more agile now.  I did notice the neck is clipping through the ears a bit, and maybe the head being default level or down a bit, rather than 10d up, might look better, in terms of default positioning.    I think the rear legs might look a bit better if the middle piece were more centered under the haunch.   Also the tail will need to be modified to address z-fighting.   Other than that I think it's looking good - powerful and dangerous!


  5. 1 hour ago, kurzninja said:

    I've thrown down 4 rocks, 4 hay, and 4 sticks, and held down right click on them all with a firestarter.

    I think it's supposed to be logs, not sticks?  Been awhile since i made one....

    1 hour ago, kurzninja said:

    Also, I've only ever found food once. I

    They do seem fairly rare.  I seem to mostly find soggy ones but that's probably because I hang around rivers and lakes a lot.  The others do exist.  It's not really possible to survive right now, so don't sweat it.  It'd probably be more feasible if animals didn't 1-shot you.  It'd be really nice if there were more 'foraging' options available right now.  It could be awhile before we can hunt animals, as I'd imagine Bioxx still needs to finish animal behavior, then finish the combat code, possibly hunting mechanics, then implement different meats (maybe....butchering?) etc, etc.  There's still a lot of basic game building blocks out there yet to be done I think, before we really get the 'fun' stuff.


  6. 15 minutes ago, KronoNomikon said:

    OK, so I redid it, but not with the extra joint on the back leg. 

    Ok, so now in the context of your most recent post.   It's good, I still think the leg section above the paws could be thinner front to back.  At the same time, a texture might change my mind.  If he looks shaggy enough maybe the thick legs read as fur.   But my instinct is thinner.  I do like the back legs Stroam did, so I'd suggest going that route.   The front legs I'm ok with.  Like I mentioned preceding this post, columnar front legs are a good option I think.  I would however try to keep the shoulder box so that only the top corner sticks out of the chest, and not any of the other 3 corners.  I still think the paws look too fat.

    I'm having a little trouble reading the head-neck-jaw area from those pics, a model would help.  Jaw might be a little long.  I think cheek puffs could be great, and they could fill in some of that area behind the jaw so you could shorten the jaw.  This is an area where we can take artistic license vs conventional portrayals.  I don' know if transparent cheeks would be the best route, this guy is a lot bigger than an ocelot - might be too insubstantial.  Might want to make it a solid block, with some slant to it, so that it doesn't read as too massive, maybe.  There's a lot of options there.  But make sure he doesn't have the derpy eyes.



  7. OK, so I wrote up all of the following and was just about to post it right before you posted your most recent post.  So read all this without the context of your latest post.  I'll start a separate reply for that.

    My main problem with the more 'real' legs is that they very likely are not going to be animated to move properly.  They'll just rotate where they join the body.  So you end up with a leg that looks all primed and ready to move, but it's just a solid wooden piece, and to me that's disappointing.  It also doesn't match well with the 'norm' in minecraft, of peg legs.  But for monsters, I'm trying to be more open to more detail.  Especially large ones.  What Stroam did there, is only 1 more box than the legs the 'normal' big cats have, and without the paw it's the same number as most of our current ungulates.  It's really just got the one angled piece in the middle, which is the same as elk and moose.  So the rear legs especially are really pretty close to our current norm.  The front legs have the extra shoulder box, but in this context that was kind of a 'special feature'.  The front legs are bending the opposite of the way they do irl though, which is jarring.   I'm much more comfortable with those back legs than the front, basically.

    But, in both the front and rear what I like is that the haunch boxes are square with the body, and the paw and lower leg are square with the ground.  The mid-legs bridge the gap from the slanted body to the flat ground.  I feel like it's not as jarring as when the body is orthogonal to the ground, and there's a bunch of leg sections all at different angles, orthogonal to neither the ground nor the body.  The unfortunate thing is the front legs, the haunch by being square to the body is setting up the wrong bending mechanic.   I opened the model to play around with the front legs a bit, and I think the only way to make them work is either have them be a straight column, or have the haunch bend backwards, in which case the rest should probably be a column.  It breaks the orthogonal haunch relationship to the body, but as long as the rest is orthogonal, I think it could work.

    All that said, I like what you did originally Krono (just maybe leg proportions a bit different).  I like that it matches better with the 'normal animals' we've already got.  And prehistoric animals are kind of a bridge between 'normal' animals, and monsters.   At the same time, I'm trying to be open for monsters to be more complex.  And so as a bridge creature, again, I'm also willing to entertain more complex legs.  If you would like to do the more complex legs, I'd say go for it.  Just try to limit them to one non-orthogonal piece.  And I should say, just to be clear for future monsters, I'll probably never be ok with things like using boxes just to try to make a slant between two other boxes.  But more boxes for more discreet structure or detail, I think is worth looking at.

    I do kind of like the shoulder feature, so if I were suggesting, I'd probably say go for the shoulders. 

    In terms of paws, regular big cat paws appear more square than long, I think, and more flat than tall. And ya, my understanding is that vanilla wolves, when their eyes turn red, that's a different texture.  And sheep shearing also just swaps textures.  The sheared version still has the wool box, it's just got no texture so it's invisible.  Same principle.  You could even have two jaws, one closed for 'normal mode' and one open for angry.  Just one or the other will be invisible at any given time.  My concern with claws is whether they'd look better as a simple vertical plane, or a fractional box.  I'm guessing fractional box, so that they're visible from the front.


  8. Might also be an opportunity to introduce some simple sand casting.  Pig iron was normally done in sand beds.  But that was industrial scale, of course.


  9. That's a good take Stroam.  You front legs are backwards and there's some proportions I'd suggest changing, but other than that I like what you did there - would you mind posting the model so we could see the legs in action?   Your call if you want to adopt some of that or not Krono.  I can go either way.


  10. Sorry didn't reply earlier.  RL stuff.   I definitely like the slanted body more.  It helps in giving it a hulking appearance.  The shoulder blade thing was just a thought.  I can kind of imagine how it'd be hard to actually implement, with animation, and have look good.  It'd probably be a lot different from the way we've structure most animals so far.  I don't think you could just lengthen the upper leg box, that'd be too long and weird, so you'd about have to do it in two pieces probably.  It definitely would be challenging and I don't have answers.  I'm fine with it being generally structured as we've been doing (which is what you have right now) - I do think the slanted body with larger chest gets the muscular idea across pretty well.

    The legs and paws still seem a bit oversized to me.  I hear what you're saying on muscular and I agree it does enhance that, but to me it also makes it look slow and clumsy, rather than lithe and agile.  Maybe if they were a bit long, so they didn't seem as stocky?

    Here's a screenshot of the mountain lion I did way-back-when in Techne, in the days before MCMC. 

    0MountainLion v2.jpg

    I structured all my big cats the same.   I think your smilidon is actually a bit smaller than my big cat models, which to me jumps out mainly in the face, and the paws.  I had three claws per pawn, which required 6-wide boxes.  I think yours are 5 with two claws - I think 3 claws would be better.  I think another very important thing for predators is to try and avoid the derpy eyes - I actually made my heads 10 wide to accommodate an extra eye pixel and center the pupils.  I think it helps them look more focused and aggressive.  Even the nose and ears appear to be 1 pixel wider than your smilodon.  So, I'd recommend scaling up the head to at least allow for that, and then scaling up the rest to match.  And if you want to go even bigger I'm fine with that.  These are primary predators of the player, and I think it'd be fine for them to be bigger than 'normal' big cats.

    I kind of agree with Stroam on the fangs - might be slightly too curved. 

    I don't think separate claws are necessary, but if you want to try it out I'm open to the notion.  It could be interesting if the texture changed so they only appear when the smilodon is angry, rather than constantly being out.



  11. Hi Krono, great to see ya back!    I think Bioxx was ok with taking some 'artistic license' with the smilodon, so don't feel totally constrained on dimensions and such.  I forget which picture he gave as an example, but as I recall it had a 'mane'.  Maybe similar to the Ark smilodon?  Not sure, and it doesn't mean that's how you have to go.  But prehistoric animals we have a bit more license I think.  And as a large and serious predator, I'm ok with them having more detail.  You could add paws for instance.

    I like what you've got with the head, and I'd be fine with even another section of fang taper if you want.  I'm ok with the ear tips as well, though I question if it will look very good once textured.   I would suggest making the legs perhaps a bit thinner, at least the front ones, and adding paws.  Since big cats' paws are a primary attack item, I think it's worth depicting them (I did that for all the 'regular' big cats).  As for "muscular", I think perhaps the best way to do that would be to use a 2-piece body, with thicker chest, and thinner waist.   A lot of big cats have what I'd consider a 'muscular' feature of their shoulder blades extending above their backbone a bit, so you can see them move.  Might be interesting to try out - though it wouldn't work well if you decided to go with a mane.  I'd also be ok with another section or two on the tail.  I'd even entertain separate 'cheek tufts' if you wanted.  I gave tigers a separate box to represent those.

    I'd also be interested in seeing just a quick texture with eyes and nose.  It's a large enough model I'm not immediately clear how they will be arranged/sized.  Maybe also a quick take on the ears to see if that diagonal section will mesh well texture-wise.   And remember that since it's prehistoric, we have no real precedent on coloration or pattern.  So feel free to try spots, stripes, or whatever.

    Just in general, unless Bioxx says otherwise, any large prehistoric or fantasy creatures - and especially highly player-aggressive ones - I'm allowing for more detail, and artistic license.   I'd still like to stay away from dramatically angled leg structures on mammals (insects are obviously a different matter in that regard) but about anything else, I think we can bump it up a notch.


  12. 2 hours ago, Stroam said:

    Stepped roofing - What sort of stepped are you talking about?

    I was just meaning a 2-step block, just like vanilla stairs (IV in your graphic).  It's just always irked me that that even in TFC1, thatch was a solid block, and you couldn't even chisel it, despite that it's most appropriate use was for roofs.  I think the 2-step model is fine considering the general blocky nature of the world.  I've never been a fan of those mods that put a slanted plane in place of steps.    The finer-grained slopes you show would just I think be a lot more polys at not that much benefit.  And pattern IV already exists, so should be much less work for you I'd imagine.

    Here is a good depiction of some standard brick layouts:

    Of course the limitations of 16x16 graphics means anything diagonal is probably out - though I might give it a shot.  Various others don't really lend themselves due to not being square in pattern.  And anything 'stacked' is relatively modern.  But the basics mentioned above are in there.

    Soldier coursing is when your orient the bricks vertically, and is typically done above windows (as a lintel), or for steps (sleepers - soldiers laying down).

    Image result for soldier course lintel


    I should say though, that flat brick lintels are a relatively modern thing, as they rely on a steel angle to support the brick.  "back in the day" a brick lintel would have used a full or jack arch to give it it's own strength, without steel:
    Image result for soldier course lintel
    Of course it would be impractical to try to do jack arches in minecraft.
    Brick soldier courses can also be used within a wall to add interest:
    Image result for brick soldier course
    And then you can do corbeling to add even more interest:
    Image result for brick corbelingImage result for corbel soldier  course
    IRL corbeling is mostly done with horizontal coursing because the bricks have to extend into the wall as well in order to be tied in with the wall, but within the context of using a 2-step model and not being strictly constrained by physics, I thought soldiers would be more visually impactful.  One could actually do a 3-step sleeper corbel model if they wanted, which would be similar to the left graphic above.  There's a huge, huge variety of sort of applique brick details one could do if one were ambitious enough. 
    It could get pretty wild, if there were several colors of brick.  Do a google search for "polychrome brickwork" and you can see some of the amazing stuff that's done with multi-color brick patterns.  The basics are red, black, and sort of off-white/tan.  Most of what one finds on the internet can't really be reproduced effectively in minecraft I think, but some could.

    Brick and half-timbering go really well together, btw

    Image result for half timber and brickImage result for half timber and brick
    Related image
    Related image







  13. I would suggest roofing blocks be stepped, to make for a finer slope.  In addition to the wood and slate roofing you mentioned, I'd suggest thatch, and a few colors of ceramic (red, blue, green). 

    I'd also suggest some alternate brick patterns.  Rather than have a separate recipe, maybe a new tool - trowel - is added, and the player simply sets the trowel to the pattern they want, and then right-clicks on a brick block to change it to that pattern.  Example patterns might be basket weave, herringbone, and Flemish bond.  a stepped soldier course for roof eaves and steps would be amazing.  And that's just layout patterns.  Bond patterns could be an entire other level.  Brickwork could be a mod all by itself, honestly.  I could probably help with the graphics, if desired.

    Regarding your patterns given, I'm interested to see how the half-timbering is implemented - that is, if it's at all automated, or the player has to selected each pattern.  You could honestly ditch the horizontal 22.5 degree angled beams.  That's almost never used irl.


  14. Ya, I'd think it might be worth trying to re-use the old TFC1 texture.  I am imagining a lot of people will have the same problem.  Or at least make it not looks so much like sand.


  15. 6 hours ago, ChunkHunter said:

    Edit: I've not encountered any clay yet,  either. 

    In my experience, most average length rivers have about 1 deposit.  So it's not very common.  It'll spawn around lakes as well I think, but the lake itself seems to delete most of the deposit, so it's hard to spot.  Easiest way is just to travel up a river till you hit it.  It looks a lot like sand so you have to be watchful.  It's not as obvious as in TFC1.  But it's bright, and interrupts the gravel river banks.  So the darker the stone of your island, the easier it is to spot.


  16. Haven't had much time for testing of late, but I noticed in clay crafting, if you don't successfully complete a shape, it still uses up the clay.  Didn't know if that was intended since it's not how it worked in TFC1. 

    It's also kind of funny how when you knap stone tools, the resulting tool heads actually get heavier.  Game balance though I guess.

    I like how the encumbrance thing looks so far.  I think it'll be good that it stays away from exact numbers.  It seems that the bar in the hud, the big long one that I assume is for encumbrance, doesn't work yet?



  17. 4 hours ago, R.o.N1N said:

    I can not assemble a workbench (open locked cells).

    Ya, I don't think Bioxx has coded that yet.  The game is VERY early alpha stages.  You can't make a saw or any metal tools yet, never mind the stuff that requires a saw to make it.  The stone age isn't complete yet, even.  The only way to "solve" the problem is go creative mode. 


  18. Adobe bricks would be good, as there was a great demand for them for TFC1, given that pretty much every LP I watched used that mod that brought in adobe bricks.  The rest of the stone age stuff are a bit 'meh' to me, unless they do in fact get incorporated into a mechanic of resisting mob attack.  The plaster and half timber stuff is what I'd be most wanting.  In TFC1 I would keep all raw chalk and granite blocks, because they were the best simulation of plaster that could be had  in vanilla TFC1.  But that was very tedious.  It'd be really great to be able to make plaster.  Maybe gypsum would be the 'easy-mode' way to get it, with baking lime the 'hard way'.


  19. Slingshots depend  upon elastic material.  Basically rubber, and irl were not possible till vulcanized rubber was discovered in the mid-1800s.  Slings on the other hand, have existed god-only-knows how long.  But have also been suggested before.     A lot.   Like, many timesA ridiculous amount, honestly, for what would be an early-game weapon, abandoned in the mid-to-late game, or at best kept for hunting.


  20. Thanks, it went through a lot of revision so I'm glad it made some sense.  I did totally forget to mention one other characteristic that could separate containers, that being speed of opening.  So chests and large vessels could open faster, barrels could have a pause, bins a longer pause, and crates could have nails in the texture, and require the player to right click each one with a hammer to open the crate.   In that scenario maybe crates could have a lot of slots, since they would not be quick-access.  Safes/vault doors would have a code to input, and then either instant, or some additional pause.

    Also  I was going to suggest having bins maybe only show half their inventory, with the rest of the slots light grey for empty or dark grey for occupied.  This would kind of represent that they are mass-storage solutions, not great for finding what you put in them fast.


  21. So I wanted to make a case for a non-enumerated system of containers and inventory. I was planning on making a separate post, but ultimately it's all about encumberance, so I decided to continue this thread.  Originally I was going to propose is a system that does not use weight at all, but found some problems so now am basically proposing to keep TFC1's system of size and weight, that does not use any numbers.  This is as opposed to the OP and in Konlii's tier-based weight/encumbrance thread.

    On 11/13/2015 at 4:36 PM, Bioxx said:

     what we gain is a more fully realized world with a purpose to a vanilla mechanic (minecarts) that even mojang has yet to provide.

    THE TLDR:  In a nutshell, I think a non-enumerated system of size and weight, like TFC1 used, would be sufficient to accomplish the above goals.   The main 'new' mechanic would be to limit heavy items like ore (and building materials if desired) to the hotbar only, and not allow them in the inventory itself.  By doing this you limit the player's native slots that can carry the heavy items, and so it becomes much easier to make conveyances that are superior in capacity.  Specifically if ore blocks dropped themselves, and then had to be pulverized for ore, those ore blocks could be made to fit only on the hotbar, and stack very low (4 or 8, perhaps).  Furthermore, I think a non-enumerated system would be simpler to balance.   Rather than having to decide how much every single thing weighs, and how much every container will hold, and trying to balance it all, and having the 'realists' complain, you only worry about 'what should fit in this container' and 'what is the effect of this weight on the player'.  There is still some balancing, but less detaily, I think.  I think it would also be easier for players to understand and plan around: it's much easier to understand how many slots you have available I think, vs figuring out how much weight capacity you need to allow for a given task (I'm assuming that in an enumerated system the player would have a meter or number to tell them how much they are currently carrying, so knowing how much weight they are already carrying would not be hard).  That's the idea in a nutshell.  I'd now like to try and portray how this system could function, and the variety of containers and conveyances that might be used to create a dynamic and interesting system.



    SIZE - basically just fit what fits inside what.  The actual effects of carrying things are based on the weight descriptor.

    TINY - tiny items fit in vessels.   Seeds, raw food, feathers, straw, etc.

    SMALL - small items fit in backpacks, NOT in vessels.  Sticks, stones, saplings, small prepared foodstuffs, and vessels.

    MEDIUM - medium items fit in barrels and chests, or just in the inventory.  Examples would be most clothing, probably leather armor.  Also, for balance purposes, scrolls, potions, and books.   Also, for those that might want a 'easy-mode' building experience, you would add 'building' items like planks, dirt, sand, cobble, raw and smooth stone, etc.  Some items like single-handed weapons, tools, logs, and ingots might be medium, but would still be restricted to their 'special' storage solutions, as in TFC1.

    LARGE - large items require the new mechanic - they cannot go in the inventory, or most carryable containers.  They only fit on the hotbar, back, or offhand slots (and if wearable, the appropriate wear slot) and sometimes multiple slots.    Large items fit inside of bins and crates, NOT barrels or chests.  I do not know if forbidding items from inventory, but allowing in hotbar is code-possible.  but for the sake of this proposal, I'm assuming so. Examples: double Ingots, sheets, double sheets, metal armor, quern wheel, ore blocks, most building blocks, doors, and empty barrels, chests, and large vessels

    HUGE - Huge items also only fit on the hotbar, and sometimes wear slots.  They are containers to contain large items: crate, bin, pack frame, heavy pack frame.  If the code does not need the container to be larger than the item (that is, if the container can be size large and also be specified to accept large items) then this category may not be needed.

    GIGANTIC - Gigantic items are conveyances that need to be able to hold bins and crates.  Hotbar only.   Again, may not be needed depending on how code works

    So you have several gradations of size, and every single size is related to certain types of containers, inventory slots, and conveyances.  The first 3 can go in the player's inventory, the last three only the hotbar and wear slots.  There are no useless size categories. 

    WEIGHTS - Weight denotes the effect that that carrying the item has on the player/conveyance

    NORMAL - No additional affects.  This is intended to cover everything through medium size, and include certain large items that are not particularly heavy (fishing poles, sacks).  For 'easy' building and mining, ore blocks and building materials would be this.

    HEFTY - Hefty items should mostly be large in size, and so will only fit on the hotbar and/or special wear slots.  If it is on the hotbar, it will slow the player, and prevent them from jumping or climbing ladders (player can still walk up stairs).  This could include things like armor and two-handed weapons, empty barrels, empty large vessels, and empty crates.   For a mid-range building/mining experience, ore blocks and building materials would be this - a single ore block could be carried in offhand+hotbar, and not restrict.  But any more and you get the restrictions.  This would pretty strongly encourage conveyances I think.

    HEAVY - Heavy items would be just like Hefty items, except that they will apply the slow/no-jump/no-ladder debuff no matter what, even when carried in the appropriate wear slot.  This will include things like full barrels, full crates, and empty bins.  Alternatively, rather than slow, it could simply prevent the player from running.  For a conveyances-basically-required experience, building material and ore blocks would be this.

    MASSIVE - Massive items (and heavier) would be items that only fit on the hotbar, and immobilize the player.   Massive items fit in pack frames and thus can be carried by a horse/camel/llama using a pack frame.  Bloomery doors and bins would be examples.  Putting anything heavier inside the pack frame destroys it and drops the item on the ground.

    ENORMOUS - Enormous items can be carried by a mule, using a heavy pack frame.  Blast Furnace, probably various other higher tier process blocks and parts.  Putting anything heavier inside the heavy pack frame destroys it and drops the item on the ground.

    IMMENSE - Immense items can only be carried by a minecart.  No specific examples at this time, but presumably high-tier machinery and the like.  Putting anything heavier in the minecart destroys it and drops the item on the ground.

    COLOSSAL - Colossal items can only be carried on a flatbed minecart.  No specific examples at this time, but presumably high-tier machinery and the like.

    I think all the goals desired could be accomplished just using the above restrictors.  This would avoid making players do maths, and having a complicated balancing of what gets what numbered capacities and weights.   Normal mining could involve ore blocks which are Large and Normal, in which case the capacity of the hotbar is the limiting factor.  Or it could be made more difficult, by making the ore Large and Heavy, in which case the player will have not only the capacity limit of the hotbar, but also the fact that they are slow/no-jump/no-ladder if carrying more than 1 block.  They can carry 1 block in their offhand and still run/jump/ladder, but this will be tedious if the player is taking the block outside the mine.  This would provide a pretty heavy incentive to use conveyances.  And if someone wants super-easy mining/ building, then make those blocks medium/normal.



    Next, I want to talk about special traits that could define containers, and make certain containers better than others for certain tasks.  Some of these will require extra mechanics, which I will talk about.  I'm going to list traits that might apply to a broad variety of containers here.  Some containers will have unique characteristics, which I'll talk about in their specific explanation.  I know this stuff will seem too detailed to some.  And indeed maybe as a whole it's too much, but I wanted to put some ideas out there.

    SIMULTANEOUS SLOT OCCUPATION - Hopefully it is possible to make some items take more than one wear slot at a time.  This was touched on in the containers and sheathes thread.  In that thread it was applied to two-handed weapons, but in this context, full barrels would be worn in the offhand, and also occupy a hotbar slot at the same time.  Representing the player using two hands to roll the barrel.

    NEW SLOTS - I'm envisioning 4 new slots; the belt slots, which would appear beside the offhand slot.  The back slot would also appear there (The slot is not new, but appearing by the hotbar is).  This would allow the player to access belt or back containers without going into inventory.  These 5 slots would be ghosted out if the player is not wearing the right containers.   In the context of hotbar-only items, these slots will be invaluable in extending the hotbar real estate.  Tools and weapons for instance could be carried in sheathes (sheathes will not appear as containers, but make their associated slot available for tools and weapons).  The sheathe slots could be dedicated for just sheathes, or could perhaps allow more belt pouches/satchels.  Items such as a tool belt might take both sheath slots.  Two handed weapons might occupy both sheathes, and more slots as well.  Any item that can be moved onto the belt or back, is more available hotbar space.

    CONTAMINATION - What if containers could be contaminated?  So you have your backpack of food, but then you toss some coal inside.  you've just contaminated your backpack with coal dust, and it gains a flag.  Maybe simply 'contaminated', or maybe specific to the contamination: 'sooty'.   In any case, all food in the backpack immediately is also flagged contaminated.  To fix this, you put the stack in your grid with a knife, and you get half the stack back, uncontaminated.  A scroll or book might have a 50% chance to become unuseable every time they are put into a contaminated container, or the first time upon contaminated goods being put in the container with the scrolls/books.  Some examples of contaminating goods, followed by specific forms of contamination in parenthesis:  all soil, sand, or gravel (dirty).  Coal (sooty), Meat (bloody), Fish (fishy).  Obviously meat wouldn't contaminate itself, same for fish.  Contaminated containers must be washed (soap?) to remove the flag.  The result of this would be to make the player think about where they're putting stuff.  Some containers will accept only certain foodstuffs, and so either protect them from contaminating agents, or isolating the agents themselves.  Clay vessels of both types (and glass containers) may not pick up spoilage flags, giving them a slight perk vs all other container types.

    DURABILITY - Maybe containers could have durability?  I know many people have expressed an aversion to this, but container durability opens an avenue for a trade skill to affect the quality.  It also opens an avenue for superior containers to be loot, and in SMP creates a market for especially fine containers.  The durability might go down every time an item is put into the container.  This concept could go hand-in-hand with:

    REPAIRABILITY - The player could repair containers.  It would keep an ongoing need for materials to extend container life.  As discussed elsewhere, it could possibly be that you can only repair a container so much, before it's a mass of patches.  In the end you just have to replace it.  In order to prevent bad timing, containers don't just spill their contents and vanish when worn out.  They cease to open.  For worn containers, you have to throw them on the ground and use a knife on them, which destroys the container and spills the contents.  For placed containers, you have to right click them with their assigned mining tool, at which point they vanish and spill their contents.  Or some similar mechanic that allows the player to choose when to destroy the item and get their stuff out.  Clay and glass containers cannot be repaired, and do not get stuck shut.  They simply shatter when they reach 0 durability.

    WEIGHT REDUCTION - Even though I'm proposing a 'non-enumerated' system, I'm not against such a system.  And if numbered weight/encumbrance does become a part of the game, I think an excellent use would be for certain containers to reduce the weight transferred to the player.  So a player could use a wheelbarrow to reduce the weight of the stone inside by 50% maybe.  Baskets could reduce crop weight.  Sheathes reduce weapon/tool weight.  Etc.  And this also provides another hook for skill to add quality, as it could add bonus weight reduction by increments of 1%, which would allow a very fine gradation according to skill.

    SPOILAGE REDUCTION - I would propose expanding the spoilage modifiers of containers in order to encourage the player to use certain containers for certain foodstuffs, and also to make large clay vessels more attractive.   I would propose most 'general purpose containers' including chests and all leather containers, increase spoilage slightly (10 or 20%) or at best be neutral. Then, baskets reduce raw vegetable/fruit spoilage, creels reduce fish spoilage, clay vessels of both types reduce spoilage for all foods slightly, and ice boxes reduce it for all foods quite a bit.  Especially for baskets, what it introduces is a low-tier container type that the player can use for early game containers, but that still remain useful later, for gathering specific foodstuffs.  By making large clay vessels non-sealable, they can be given a slight innate preservation bonus, so that they're not just an inferior barrel.

    FINES LOSS - Fines loss is the notion that some containers aren't appropriate for very small items.  Sand, gravel, grain, and coal might be examples.  Expressed as a percentage, it is the percent chance that, upon putting an item (or stack) in a container, 1 of the stack will be lost.   The idea being to encourage  use of their specific containers,or clay vessels, which have 0 loss.  This would be a very specific characteristic.  For instance a reed hamper has a high loss rate, but sand and gravel blocks won't even fit.  So really grain and coal and other small loss-able items would be the major risks.  This event would need to be accompanied by a message or sound, to let the player know it's not a bug.




    Would it not be great if containers could exist in grades, with higher grades having better characteristics?  In TFC1, a vessel is just a vessel, a chest is a chest.  you'd never take them as loot, they basically have 0 value.   But I think having multiple grades opens up the possiblity of containers as loot, and also containers as a trade good in SMP servers.  I would propose that higher grade containers be semi-random, like dwarf fortress.  So if there are five levels of container quality (normal, fine, excellent, masterful, Legendary) a novice might have a small chance to produce a fine product, but no chance at excellent or masterful, nevermind legendary.  At adept skill, a larger fine chance, but also small excellent chance. At master you might be more likely to produce a fine container than normal, with also a good chance at excellent and masterful.  Legendary containers would only be able to be produced by a master, but even then only at a small chance.  This would be like a 'legendary' item in dwarf fortress.  This provides that extra little 'kick' to keep masters occupied, even at max skill level.  Even at lower levels, people love surprises.  Will you just make that one backpack and be happy with it?  Or will you ranch the hell out of animals and produce the finest backpacks around?  I think it would add a lot to the production part of the game, potentially.  If a master has a 1% chance to produce a legendary object, you just shifted the meta from just having to use X materials to make the best container possible, to having to on average use 100X the materials, to make a legendary.

    ITEM WEIGHT - Again, if weight does become the thing, a higher skilled artisan could make a lighter container.   This would be easier to do with items having specific weights.  In Konlii's tiered weight system, it might be less easy as the jumps between tiers might be a lot. 

    WEIGHT REDUCTION - For items that reduce the weight of the things they contain, this reduction could be improved for better items.  Again, this could be scaled by percentage points, so very responsive to skill level.  But, it would need to be balanced against the original reduction, the fact you don't want it to reduce weight to 0, and the fact that there will likely be magic to reduce the weight also.

    SLOTS - number of slots could be increased.  At five quality levels, this may be more practical with larger containers - who are only competing with the hotbar - but still, it's a factor.  If a basic item has 5x3=15 slots, you could add four more ranks of 3 to the right and get to 27 at Legendary.  A basic chest could have 10 slots, and expand up to 18 (20 to 36 for double).  And so on.  It's less scaleable than item weight and weight reduction, but I think it could still be significant and responsive.  But, some containers you may not want to even go up 1 per quality level (vessels for instance) so sometimes maybe you just get other improvements.

    DURABILITY, SPOILAGE, FINES LOSS - All of these could also be improved with increasing player skill.




    So now that I've given my background thoughts, here's a list of containers I've been operating with.  I've divided it into 3 categories - containers that are intended to be carried, those intended to be placed (though a few can be sealed and carried), and conveyances (which includes mount-related stuff).  For placed containers, an * means they can be sealed and carried.  I've revised these a few times and there may be inconsistencies, due to the spoiler mechanics of these forums.  But it gives some idea.

    WORN CONTAINERS Item type limit Tech Lvl Slots Max Sz/Wght Self Size/Wght Worn On Durability Place? Rack? Repair? Spoil Mod Wght Mod Loss
    Reed pouch All non-liquids stone 4 tiny/Norm Small Belt low No No No 0%   30%
    Reed Basket raw fruit+veggies stone 8 tiny/Norm Small inv/hotbar low Yes No No -10% -25%  
    Reed Hamper All non-liquids stone 8 Small/norm Large back low Yes No No 0%   30%
    Reed Creel Raw fish stone 12 tiny/Norm Small Belt low No Yes No -80% -35%  
    Leather pouch All non-liquids stone 4-8 tiny/Norm Small Belt high No Yes Leather 20%   10%
    Leather Backpack All non-liquids stone 12-20 Small/norm Large back high No Yes Leather 20% -10% 10%
    Leather scroll case Scrolls stone 12-24 tiny/Norm Small Belt high No Yes Leather   -35%  
    leather potion bag Potions stone 12-24 tiny/Norm Small Belt high No Yes Leather   -25%  
    Leather Sheathe 1 Weapon or Tool stone 1 N/A Medium Belt high No Yes Leather   -50%  
    Leather Water Skin water stone 100mb N/A Small Belt medium No Yes Leather      
    Cloth sack All non-liquids copper 12-18 Med/Norm Large Hotbar medium No No cloth 10%   10%
    Frame Pack All non-liquids copper 12-24 Med/Norm Large back high No Yes cloth 20% -20% 5%
    Clay vessel All stone 4-6/100mb tiny/Norm Medium inv/hotbar Shatter Yes No No -10%   0%
    Clay Jug water stone 100mb N/A Medium inv/hotbar Shatter Yes No No      
    Mason's Hod bricks, mortar copper 12 Large/Heavy Large/Hefty Offhand high No No No   -60%  
    Burlap Sack grain copper 12 Med/Norm Large/Norm Hot + Off medium Yes No No 0% -50% 0%
    Coal Scuttle coal copper 12 Small/norm Large/Hefty Hotbar high Yes No No   -50% 0%
    Tool Belt Tools stone 8 Med/norm Large/Norm Belt (2 slots) medium No Yes Leather   -50%  
    Wheelbarrow dirt, sand, etc copper 12-24 Large/Heavy Large/Norm Hot + Off high Yes No planks   -80% 0%
    Sledge Meat & carcasses stone 9 Heavy/Heavy Large/Hefty Hot + Off medium No No No   -60%  


    PLACED CONTAINERS Type Limit Tech Lvl Slots Max Size/Wght Self Size/Wght Worn On Durability Place? Rack? Repair? Spoil Mod Wght Mod Loss
    Lg Clay Vessel All stone 9-15/500mb Med/Norm Large/Hefty Hot+Off Very High Yes No No -20%   0%
    Chest All non-liqds copper? 12-18 Med/Norm Large/Norm N/A medium Yes No planks     10%
    Bin All non-liqds copper 12-18 Large/Heavy Huge/Massv N/A Very High Yes No planks     0%
    Barrel* All copper 12-18/10kmb Med/Norm Large/Heavy Hot+Off high Yes No No -20%   0%
    Crate* All non-liqds copper 4 Large/Heavy Large/Heavy Hot+Off Very High Yes No planks     0%
    Gem Cabinet* Gem & rings copper 54 tiny/Norm Large/Heavy Hot+Off Very High Yes No planks   -40% 0%
    Rack tools, weapons+ copper 4 items Med/Norm Large/Norm N/A Infinite Yes No N/A      
    Bookcase books copper 6 books Small/Norm Large/Norm N/A Infinite Yes No N/A      
    Ice Chest all food copper 12 (plus ice) Med/Norm Large/Heavy N/A Very High Yes No zinc plate -50%   0%
    Safe Ingots, jewelry iron 6 Large/Heavy Huge/Immen N/A Very High Yes No Oil     0%
    Vault door Special iron N/A N/A Huge/Immen N/A Very High Yes No Oil     0%

    *=sealable for transport.  large clay vessels would be sealable for processing, but upon breaking the block would spill the contents.

    CONVEYANCE Type Limit Tech Lvl Slots Max Sz/Wght Self Size Worn On Durability Place? Rack? Repair? Spoil Mod Wght Mod Loss
    hand cart All non-liquids copper 12-18 Huge/Massive Gigantic N/A Very High Yes No planks     10%
    horse/camel/llama All non-liquids N/A varies Huge/Massive N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
    donkey All non-liquids N/A varies Huge/Enorm N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
    minecart All non-liquids iron varies Huge/Immense Gigantic N/A Very High Yes No iron     0%
    flatbed minecart All non-liquids steel 1 Huge/Colossal Gigantic N/A Very High Yes No steel     0%
    Leather Saddlebags All non-liquids stone 9-21 Small/normal Medium Mount high No Yes Leather 20% -40% 10%
    pack frame All non-liquids copper 4-8 Huge/Massive Gigantic Mount Very High            
    heavy pack frame All non-liquids iron 6-10 Huge/Enorm Gigantic Mount Very High            







    A more detailed explanation.  The general frame of operation would no longer be using barrels for long-range transportation.  Sealed barrels and vessels would prevent the player from running, jumping, and using ladders.   The intent is to use conveyances to long-distance travel.  Until the player makes a cart or tames an animal, moving will be inconvenient.  But, given that TFC2 seems to be counting on a more mobile playstyle at least for the first few islands, that may be ok.

    REEDS - The first containers the player makes will be made of reeds.  Or maybe grass if there's no desire to make reeds a new drop.  But grass is super-easy to get.  The player can make a pouch for tiny items, hamper to carry small items on their back, and basket and creel for food.  None improve with skill.  The basket and creel should stay useful later in the game.

    CLAY - the next tech step.  The player can make vessels, which are like pouches but don't fit on the belt, but do give a little preservation bonus (or rather, less penalty).  Also no fines loss, and can be used as a 'clay bucket' if tiers of buckets are desired.  Large clay vessels CANNOT be sealed and moved while full.  Clay containers never have fines loss.

    LEATHER - these will be long-term general use containers. 

    Scroll cases only hold scrolls, but can hold a lot of them.  the scroll case can be worn on the belt, and it would be good if some sort of quick-access could be arranged.  Or maybe the first slot of the scroll case show up on the hotbar, but immediate use.

    Potion Cases only hold potions, but can hold a lot.  Preferably with a quick-access format as mentioned for scroll cases.  For extra utility, there could be a mechanic implemented where any time the player takes falling damage, there is a percent chance that one (or more?) potions carried in their inventory or any container therein, breaks.  UNLESS it is in a potion case, in which case it is protected.

    Sheathes are worn on the belt.  They do not actually contain anything, they merely activate one of the sheathe slots adjacent to the hotbar, so the player can put a weapon or tool there.  If a sheathe is worn on the back and two belt slots, the player can place a two-handed weapon in one of them, which also greys out the other two, plus maybe a hotbar slot. 

    Sacks are large and are worn only on the hotbar, but can hold medium items.  They and frame packs are the only containers that can hold medium items, but don't encumber the player or require two slots.  They're basically for looting.

    Mason's Hod - Non-encumbering when held in the offhand, and holds lots of bricks and mortar.  This is mainly if building is to be made more difficult.  If bricks and mortar fit in inventory, then it would be minimally useful.

    Coal Scuttle - holds large amounts of coal.  player can refill blocks that take coal as a fuel by right-blicking on them with the scuttle.  Perhaps normal right click adds 8 coal, Shift-right-click adds fills to max with coal.  This is placeable, and can be picked up by right-clicking with an empty hand.  Will be more useful if contamination is a thing.

    Tool Belt - holds 8 tools, and takes both sheathe slots on the belt.  It would be good if there were a way to quick-select tools, but in any case, the tools in the first two slots appear on the corresponding sheathe slots next to the hotbar.

    Wheelbarrow - similar to the mason's hod, it holds lots of dirt, sand, gravel, cobble, and stone.

    Sledge - Easy to construct in the field, for use in hauling animal carcasses.  Only really useful if butchering as a more complex mechanic comes to be.


    In a more complex system, chests and large vessels would be easy to carry, but not sealable.   Their corollaries would be crates and barrels, both of which are sealable, but encumbering.  But they can be sealed and put on conveyances, making the conveyance more efficient.  Bins would not be sealable, but would hold large amounts of almost anything.

    Gem Cabinet - has two trays, each holding 27 gems or jewelry items.  Helps in organizing multiple grades of gems in a smaller space.

    Rack - the standard rack of TFC1.  Can now also hold certain containers, such as creels, baskets, and tool belts.

    Ice Chest - stores and preserves food, and has a separate slot for ice, which fuels it.  It is two blocks tall.

    Safe - stores ingots and jewelry.  Will not fit in any container.  It is immense and can only be carried on a minecart or flatbed.  Has a code mechanism or other way to lock it.

    Vault Door - not technically a container, it's a door.  Goes hand-in-hand with plated blocks which would be immune to breaking, and only able to be removed via right-clicking on 1 of the six sides with a tool (this side will be visually different from the plated sides).  This allows a walk-in vault to be built, with all the removal faces facing inward, and the vault door used to control access.  It can only be disassembled if you have access to the inside of the vault.

    So that's all the basic details.   There would of course be other containers, this was just a basic list.   I was going to add more containers (like Stroam's seed bags) but the spoiler mechanics of this forum and the table I cut and pasted, don't play well.  

    In the early game, large items could be cumbersome to deal with.  The player's first copper mine will probably be where the player sets up operations.    They may well process the ore down in the mine, since it will be somewhat tedious to carry it out, without conveyances or pack frames.  They can carry 1 block at a time and run and jump and climb, but any more and they can't do those.  So they would have to build a staircase out of the mine, and they would have to walk it.  But, once the player has that first saw, they can make a cart, maybe a pack frame and crates, and now they can transport ore more effectively.  There is still the question of what would make the player use minecarts for mining vs pack animals, since pack animals don't require tracks.  It could perhaps be that some ores are even heavier, and cannot be carried by pack animals (or wooden rails).  These would probably be fantasy ores, maybe iron.   If such ores were y-limited to deeper regions, it would make the staircase scenario less practical.   The track problem could also be alleviated somewhat if there are mineshafts - similar to the abandoned mineshafts in vanilla, except not abandoned.  They could provide a good supply of tracks. 

    There could also be added weight categories, for instance that only prevent the player from climbing ladders and jumping, but still allows them to run. 

    But anyway, that's my case on why limiting certain large items to the hotbar could make the non-enumerated system still deserves consideration.




  22. 29 minutes ago, Stroam said:

    so wearing just armor decreases and carrying nothing takes twice as long as compared to wearing nothing and carrying nothing. That's a 100% speed decrease. So should a full inventory and full plate be equal to 200% speed decrease? 

    I think you meant something like 50% and 75% decreases?  A 100% decrease would be immobilized.  Are we talking in the context of an enumerated weight system?  I'd think it'd be better just to base it on total weight, and the armor weighs a lot?  Unless the plan were to discourage the player from wearing heavy armor constantly, as is the norm in TFC1 (or vanilla, for that matter).  In that case it actually probably would simplify things to just give the armor a speed debuff all it's own.  50% seems like too much to me though.